What should be the biggest story of our time, is getting absolutely no mention

“Can you imagine that, what should be the biggest story of our time, bigger than Watergate, is getting absolutely no mention, ZERO, in the New York Times, Washington Post, ABC Fake News, NBC Fake News, CBS Fake News, ratings-dead CNN, and MSDNC. This in itself is a scandal, the fact that a story so big, so powerful, and so important for the future of our Nation is getting zero coverage from LameStream, is being talked about all over the world. Just like they wouldn’t talk about the many Biden corruption scandals prior to the Election, (or for that matter now!), they won’t talk about this, which is potentially even bigger. It shows how totally corrupt and shameless the media is. Can you imagine if the roles were reversed and the Republicans, in particular President Donald Trump, got caught illegally spying into the Office of the President? All hell would break loose and the electric chair would immediately come out of retirement. The good news is, everybody is talking about not only this atrocity against our Nation, but that the press refuses to even mention the major crime that took place”

By Donald J. Trump

This post has 68 comments.

Share this:
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
68 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Mark Rakow

I thought the stolen election was the biggest story of our time.

No, wait; Trump said that “Russia, Russia, Russia” was the biggest story of our time.

Oops. No; he said investigating his taxes was the biggest story of our time.

No, that’s wrong. The so-called crisis at the southern border is the biggest story of our time.

Hmmm. Seems we have too many of the biggest stories of our times. Or maybe Trump has way too much time on his hands. A few years at Leavenworth sounds like just the ticket.

Diane Roy

The news media are covering up the truth I exposed nearly four years ago. We have everything and nothing can stop what is coming. Many are getting arrested for crimes against humanity.

Elizabeth Headley

Hi! Join me folks!
I’m just waiting on JUSTICE TO ARRIVE!

Mark Rakow

Hope you’re sitting down. It’s going to be a very long wait.

Glenn

True justice is a slam dunk – no wait!!

griffthegrand

I know you’re not surprised in the least, as you’ve exposed what many of us have known for years about the FAKE MSM so called news.

Way back many many years when they consolidated the outlets within the hands of a very few and the narratives began to be controlled.

Those who knew taught their children to read between the lines, check multiple sources, and especially those that are castigated by the cabal.

Now fortunately we have the internet to dig deeper and find information from those exposing the lies and powers behind the corruption.

At least we did, as they’ve been trying to take back our power to gain knowledge, especially since you got elected in 2016.

You have them running scared, and exposing just how deep the swamp is, and how severe the actions required will be to remove them not only from elected office, but more importantly the un-elected positions within the government, along with all that has happened over the 7+ years since you first started running for office has brought to light but especially over the past 2 years has opened the eyes of many who believed the unfounded and baseless lies and propaganda being brought against you as they watched you methodically take apart their global agenda, even with all those who opposed you tirelessly working to destroy and shut you down.

It’s now up to us to stand strong together and get involved in the process to make the necessary changes of personnel within the mechanisms of every system of Government at every level.

Can we? Will we?

Or will we sit on the sidelines cheer leading, critiquing, and expecting you to somehow take care of it all when it’s not ever within the purview of your powers as President.

Elizabeth Headley

Thanks! You said it all!

FloridaRobert

😬

Becky G

In this life or the next, crooked Hillary and all the evil,satanic cabal will get what they have coming…
Waiting for military tribunals… Please televise! LINE THEM ALL UP….
Punishments for TREASON??? HUMMMM….
OPTION 1 or 2…
I’m luvin both options..
💖🇺🇲💖🇺🇲
🤠🤠🤠

Mark Rakow

I’m quite sure I’ve mentioned this before. Military tribunals are only used in cases involving members of the military, and/or those subject toe the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Point being, of course, there won’t be any military tribunals.

As for treason, do yourself a favor, do a bit of research, and become a more informed citizen. I assure you; it will be well worth your time. The fact is, these allegations do not meet the definition of treason. Not even close. Not by any stretch of the imagination.

Prize

Don’t worry. They’re all talking about your accountants quitting,the false or misleading financial reports you gave them for the last ten years, and the New York AG’s involvement.

TOMMY

I’m sure they will, because just like you, Mr. Booby Prize, they are LIARS!!

Marijo Makufka

I know the insanity we call the lamestream media is sloooowly but surely breathing its last breath before complete expiration.
What I also know is it’s not just the reporters that have to pack up their things and go, it’s the entire news organization that backs them, AND it is the demonic forces that pay and prop up the horrible and corrupt networks/newspapers/websites.
We want their demise NOW, yet we are patient because it is a veeeery deep swamp you’re draining.
We the People will outlast them.
We the People make up your beautiful MAGA MOVEMENT.
We the People believe in and stand behind you, Mr. President.
As long as it takes to bring down the corrupt system, we will remain with you.
We the People want the PATRIOTIC, ANGELIC NEWS SYSTEM (NEWSYSTEM?) we know you have ready in the wings.
We the People will not give up.
We the People will not back down.
We the People will remain by your side until YOU, THE GREATEST, MOST BELOVED, DULY ELECTED 2ND TERM PRESIDENT and YOUR AMAZING, GREATEST FIRST FAMILY EVER are rightly returned to the White House.
I pray blessings over you and yours!

SpiritFoxxx

Beautifully said, my friend. Beautifully said!

Teru

I hope this blows up in their faces and they implode.

My Man Trump

Are you surprised. They are not going to give you any attention or tell the world that you were right and they were dead wrong and should be locked up. They are all either guilty or complicit. Either way they should all go to jail, at the very least. When these people are gone, Mr. President, we will get our good reputation back in the world. But not until they are gone.

Elizabeth Headley

Blessings friend! Best succinct reply! I need to learn this!

JMF

Learning of the Lame-Stream Media is like learning about 1978’s discovery of Niagara Falls, NY NEIGHBORHOOD – LOVE CANAL TOXIC WASTE DUMPING (thanks to HOOKER CHEMICAL).

I was a kid. I saw what it did to my parent’s friend. From gardening his skin was firetruck red and was falling off his hands.

They are like one in the same…. That is to say; Toxic.

Today, people talk. We talk on line (one day “TRUTH SOCIAL”) and we talk face to face.

Young people; learn to talk more face to face with anybody – young or old. Set down you phones and look people in the eyes. Learn to read people.

Take off your mask be it real or false front.

LEARN. DO IT THE REAL WAY – GET OFF LINE.

SHARE, LIVE, and ENJOY LIFE.

You’ll feel your best this way.

Mark Rakow

It can’t be too important. Trump didn’t even bother to say what it is.

America misses Trump

Sir,
I pray daily for your return to office, your saftey, and the saftey of your family. We all know where you are supposed to be. No president has ever faced fire like you have, and come out on the other side. Only by the grace of God. The last play of the SB last nigh Donald sacked Joe.. Fitting!

Last edited 7 months ago by America misses Trump
James Berg

Biden’s DOJ doesn’t enforce laws on Democrats. We need to take back congress and impeach Biden & Harris. 

Mark Rakow

Oh? Such as?

William d Byerline

Those who should be prosecuting these obvious Crimes should be prosecuted as well. Who should be doing their job? But aren’t. America needs to know why nothing is being done about it

Mark Rakow

Nothing is being done about it? You’ve got to be kidding.

The very fact that Durham submitted this report and the court filing shows that something is being done about it.

Geez…..

Caseydog3

All these Criminals in DC need some hard Justice

SpiritFoxxx

Isn’t is wonderful that the press isn’t covering it? I think so! Because, people are seeing it. They’re beginning to see that the news outlets that they have trusted for decades do not actually cover truth. The people are questioning their very own MSM and this is beautiful!

Mark Rakow

The press isn’t covering it, because it was just a court filing. This is a routine step in any Federal prosecution, which is ongoing. Certain documents must be submitted within a time frame, in order to meet the guidelines established in such a case. There’s just not much here to report, and there’s not much that can be reported yet.

Furthermore, the person named in the court filing is the same individual who is already scheduled for indictment. No one new was mentioned in the filing, and, frankly, there wasn’t a whole lot of additional information. Point being, this wasn’t covered by the press because there’s just not much more they can say at this point.

Think about it. When a criminal case is being investigated, do the police let the media know every detail of their investigation? No, they don’t. Conversely, if the media has the information, do they automatically release it to the public? Of course not. The accused have rights, and the prosecution can’t afford to jeopardize their case, by publicizing details before the investigation is complete.

It only makes sense. But, of course, good sense isn’t a MAGA trait.

Becky Peterson

Jake Sullivan implicated in New Durham filing!
Criminal in charge of the NSA committed
Espionage on a sitting US President ordered by Hillary Clinton, another crime of the century with NO ARRESTS! President Trump was spied on and told us he was!
America has a constitution for a reason!
Clinton and associates for prison!

Mark Rakow

“Implicated” has no legal standing.
No “criminal” can possibly be in that position. For one thing, there’s no way he could pass a background check, nor receive a security clearance. Get a clue.
“Espionage” is not intra-national. It’s only in terms of foreign activity. Learn a few things before you post idiotic nonsense.

There’s no evidence whatsoever it was ordered by Hillary Clinton. Calling it a “crime of the century” is just plain stupid. But who am I telling what?
Arrests don’t necessarily follow in such a case. Only indictments, and one is pending.
Trump was not “spied on.” He exaggerates, lies, and tells you all sorts of stupid things. It doesn’t make them true or accurate – and it certainly doesn’t make them any less stupid.

America has a Constitution for a reason. No kidding?
“Clinton and associates for prison.” More stupidity, of course.

OK. Any more nonsensical notions, or stupid statements, or oafish opinions?
No?
Good.

Last edited 7 months ago by Mark Rakow
pete

Let’s give article this a big “thumbs Down”.

Kreg Vergith

“Hillary’s goons spied on your campaign? Never happened.”
“Joe’s deep in the pockets of China and Russia? Hey, wait. Look at this shiny object over here.”

The Fake News will never come clean.

Diane Roy

They are knowingly covering up the truth, Drain the swamp President Donald J Trump~MAGA

Elizabeth Curtiss

Most ppl know that the MSM is owned by families of globalist. They will never do what is ethical or moral because they are evil satanic ppl that want to destroy America as we have known it so that they will maintain and gain power. President Trump is our only hope. If he can’t defeat them, truly, no human being can. He has more on his side but the ppl on their side control everything. The only way to stop them is to stop helping them to defeat us by not being puppets buying their products, stop watching their propaganda throughout every platform, working in their companies. We need to take a stand like the truckers and also boycott and strike everywhere. I am telling you that is the only way. We have to beat them financially. These ppl are super wealthy with all the control. We are sheep allowing them to maintain it by our own actions. If you watched the Superbowl last night, that is an example of why we are losing this war with the globalist. Ppl just want stop helping them. It is pathetically weak! Oh, are you still buying through Amazon? Point made!

Mark Rakow

If Trump is our only hope, we really are in trouble.

THosk

Who we gonna hope for? Biden, Kamala, Obi Wan Kenobi?

Nah, I think the only one that can defeat the Empire is TRUMP.

Mark Rakow

How sad that we’ll never see that.
I’m sorry; I lied. I’ve never been a very convincing liar, so I seldom even try.

The fact is, it’s not sad at all. The fact remains; Trump will never be President again. But in all honesty, the Republican Party is headed for the most serious crisis in its history, over the next two years. If Trump decides to run for President, and party leadership, for whatever reason, decides they can’t, or won’t, support him, there’s going to be hell to pay. I’d rather not guess what would happen, but I assure you, it’ll be much worse than the party split back in 1912, when Theodore Roosevelt and his supporters walked out.

Republicans need to carefully consider what would happen if Trump and his supporters walked out. That could easily happen, much more easily than some would care to admit. Biden is unlikely to be the Democratic nominee in 2024, and neither is Kamala, but the Dems could nominate Elmer Fudd, and Fudd would win. If the GOP splits, the “other Republican,” whoever it is, won’t win, and Trump won’t win either. What’s more, if Republicans don’t settle their differences before 2028, the same thing could happen again, and worse. The schism in the party is huge. There’s a very real possibility America won’t see another Republican elected President for a long time, and quite possibly never again, not in my lifetime at least.

You probably won’t believe this, but I do not want that to happen. We dare not let it happen, either; one-party rule for very long is truly a recipe for disaster. Despite whatever faults, America needs the Republican Party, and very badly. Sure, I’m a lifelong Democrat, but that doesn’t mean I want to see them permanently in power. Because, in all honesty, I know how they are. Power is like tequila; it goes right to their heads.

Elizabeth Headley

The day is here, Sir!
A NEW DAY has dawned!
I, nor ANY AMERICAN, should let this “STAND” not even another day!!! ENOUGH! ENOUGH ALREADY! I AM SICK OF THEM ALL!
TWENTY FOUR SEVEN COVERAGE OF ALL THEIR CRIMES, ISN’T ENOUGH!! I HEAR CRICKETS!! THEY JUST GO SILENT!! NOO MORE!
Let it STAND that there will NOT BE ANOTHER ELECTION! EVER! UNTIL THE GUILTY HAVE PAID FOR STEALING 2020!! AND TRUMP WILL BE PRESIDENT FOR LIFE!! YOU CAN REMIND THEM, THEY DID IT TO THEMSELVES!!! Then we will see what IS the outcome of TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome)!!
IT’S TIME, PEOPLE, TO TELL EACH AND EVERY GUILTY, COMPLICIT DEMONCRAT/RINO/SATANIST-ATHIEST/MARXIST-PEDO/RACIST NAZI THAT THEIR TIME HAS EXPIRED! NO TIME LEFT TO PANDER! NONE! GAME OVER! SILENCE THEM!
IT’S TIME PEOPLE ,TO TELL EACH & EVERY GUILTY PLAYER THAT THEIR TIME IS UP!!! TIME TO PAY THE PIPER. DO NOT GO PAST GO! YOU ARE HEADED FOR LIFE IN PRISON, OR THE GALLOWS! NO OTHER ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE! GET THIS OVER WITH!! PEOPLE SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE IN COURT; TREASON & TYRANNY/COLLUSION WITH FOREIGN NATIONS-ENEMIES IN AN ELECTION: EQUALS DEATH! (THIS WILL ALWAYS GET THE LITTER BOX CLEANED!)

Mark Rakow

Drunk typing is a bad habit.

griffthegrand

Actually bark bark she makes far more sense than you or any of the other trolls coming around here do.

Which doesn’t take much to accomplish.

Wanna play fetch, good doggy.

Mark Rakow

Fetch this.

Then, bite me.

Daniel Zakaluzny

ABC is Fake News.

JERRY PYEATT

I’ve been watching the awesome news that covers the freedom CONVOY & it’s an atrocity that they show clips from fake news coverage is so fullashit & the lies being said about people who just want freedom & to be able to live a life without force of power hungry lying pieces of garbage who lie & say they’re breaking the law, they mean breaking law they made up & everyone is supposed to just accept they’re bullshit lies and accept the scaremongering tactic & accept tyrannical power hungry lying this needed stomping out like a campfire getting out of control , what I’m seeing & hearing is unacceptable the other hand what we don’t see & dont hear is truth from fake MSM & they need off the airwaves PRONTO ASAP they’re making GOOD HARD WORKING AMERICAN PEOPLE SICK.

cindy

They need to be put on the spot. True free confident reporters get after it.

Steve F.

The lack of reporting by regime controlled propaganda media about the Hillary- Democrat scandal makes perfect sense to me. They’ll never report on it, in fact, they’ll all plead the 5th at the trial if it ever goes. Reporting on this scandal is akin to self-incrimination, as they were the primary enablers, whose active participation in the coverup and fraud against America would be considered treason by any normal standard. The propaganda media would be even more excoriated and loathed than they are today, and then finally bankrupted out of business. If only.

Pissed Off

Absolutely they hack everything and control everything remotely the true definition of Corporate Thugs.. The
Hate
U
Give

Nicola Spagnolo Jr.

It is CRIMINAL!! All these FAKE NEWS MEDIAS, Big techs, and Democrats need to be charged and locked up!

Dean

You should check the facts..

Mark Rakow

Absurd.

Don'tCallMeShirley

you lost move on!

Dean

Interesting to note that many of the people making a lot of noise about this “story” were recently involved in efforts to overturn the government of the United States.

THosk

Dean, when you were away on your trip to Alpha-Centauri.

The rest of the world figured out that the Jan 6th commission w/Pelosi and friends, is just another partisan political witch-hunt.

(Welcome back)

Dean

This is from the Durham court filing on Feb 11 :

4. The Indictment also alleges that, beginning in approximately July 2016, Tech Executive-1 had worked with the defendant, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm-1 on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, numerous cyber researchers, and employees at multiple Internet companies to assemble the purported data and white papers. In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data. Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract. Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish “an inference” and “narrative” tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain “VIPs,” referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton Campaign.

5. The Government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (“DNS”) Internet traffic pertaining to (i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (“EOP”). (Tech Executive-1’s employer, Internet Company-1, had come to access and maintain dedicated servers for the EOP as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP. Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.)

griffthegrand

How convenient deeny weeny.

“in summa”

https://irp.cdn-website.com/5be8a42f/files/uploaded/DurhamSussman0211.pdf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA :
: v. : Criminal Case No. 21-582 (CRC)
: MICHAEL A. SUSSMANN, :
: Defendant.

: GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO INQUIRE INTO POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

1. The United States of America, by and through its attorney, Special Counsel John H. Durham, respectfully moves this Court to inquire into potential conflicts of interest arising from the representation of the defendant by his current counsel, Latham & Watkins LLP (“Latham”). The Government has discussed these matters with the defense and believes that any potential conflicts likely could be addressed with a knowing and voluntary waiver by the defendant upon consultation with conflict-free counsel as appropriate. The Government believes that any such waiver should be put on the record prior to trial. As set forth in further detail below, it is possible that conflicts of interest could arise from the fact that Latham and/or its employees (i) previously represented others in the Special Counsel’s investigation whose interests may conflict with those of the defendant, (ii) previously represented the defendant and his prior employer in connection with events that likely will be relevant at trial or at any sentencing, and (iii) maintained professional and/or personal relationships with individuals who could be witnesses in these proceedings. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth below, the government respectfully requests that the Court inquire into the potential conflicts of interest set forth herein. Defense counsel has advised that the defendant has   been apprised of these issues, understands that he has the right to consult independent counsel, and presently intends to waive any potential conflict of interest. In support of this Motion, the government represents the following:

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

2. The defendant is charged in a one-count indictment with making a materially false statement to the FBI, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 (the “Indictment”). As set forth in the Indictment, on Sept. 19, 2016 – less than two months before the 2016 U.S. Presidential election – the defendant, a lawyer at a large international law firm (“Law Firm-1”) that was then serving as counsel to the Clinton Campaign, met with the FBI General Counsel at FBI Headquarters in Washington, D.C. The defendant provided the FBI General Counsel with purported data and “white papers” that allegedly demonstrated a covert communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russia-based bank (“Russian Bank-1”). The Indictment alleges that the defendant lied in that meeting, falsely stating to the General Counsel that he was not providing the allegations to the FBI on behalf of any client. In fact, the defendant had assembled and conveyed the allegations to the FBI on behalf of at least two specific clients, including (i) a technology executive (“Tech Executive-1”) at a U.S.-based Internet company (“Internet Company1”), and (ii) the Clinton Campaign.

3. The defendant’s billing records reflect that the defendant repeatedly billed the Clinton Campaign for his work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations. In compiling and disseminating these allegations, the defendant and Tech Executive-1 also had met and communicated with another law partner at Law Firm-1 who was then serving as General Counsel to the Clinton Campaign (“Campaign Lawyer-1”).

4. The Indictment also alleges that, beginning in approximately July 2016, Tech Executive-1 had worked with the defendant, a U.S. investigative firm retained by Law Firm-1 on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, numerous cyber researchers, and employees at multiple Internet companies to assemble the purported data and white papers. In connection with these efforts, Tech Executive-1 exploited his access to non-public and/or proprietary Internet data. Tech Executive-1 also enlisted the assistance of researchers at a U.S.-based university who were receiving and analyzing large amounts of Internet data in connection with a pending federal government cybersecurity research contract. Tech Executive-1 tasked these researchers to mine Internet data to establish “an inference” and “narrative” tying then-candidate Trump to Russia. In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain “VIPs,” referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton Campaign.

5. The Government’s evidence at trial will also establish that among the Internet data Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited was domain name system (“DNS”) Internet traffic pertaining to (i) a particular healthcare provider, (ii) Trump Tower, (iii) Donald Trump’s Central Park West apartment building, and (iv) the Executive Office of the President of the United States (“EOP”). (Tech Executive-1’s employer, Internet Company-1, had come to access and maintain dedicated servers for the EOP as part of a sensitive arrangement whereby it provided DNS resolution services to the EOP. Tech Executive-1 and his associates exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump.)

6. The Indictment further details that on February 9, 2017, the defendant provided an updated set of allegations – including the Russian Bank-1 data and additional allegations relating to Trump – to a second agency of the U.S. government (“Agency-2”). The Government’s evidence at trial will establish that these additional allegations relied, in part, on the purported DNS traffic that Tech Executive-1 and others had assembled pertaining to Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s New York City apartment building, the EOP, and the aforementioned healthcare provider. In his meeting with Agency-2, the defendant provided data which he claimed reflected purportedly suspicious DNS lookups by these entities of internet protocol (“IP”) addresses affiliated with a Russian mobile phone provider (“Russian Phone Provider-1”). The defendant further claimed that these lookups demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations. The Special Counsel’s Office has identified no support for these allegations. Indeed, more complete DNS data that the Special Counsel’s Office obtained from a company that assisted Tech Executive-1 in assembling these allegations reflects that such DNS lookups were far from rare in the United States. For example, the more complete data that Tech Executive-1 and his associates gathered – but did not provide to Agency-2 – reflected that between approximately 2014 and 2017, there were a total of more than 3 million lookups of Russian Phone-Provider-1 IP addresses that originated with U.S.-based IP addresses. Fewer than 1,000 of these lookups originated with IP addresses affiliated with Trump Tower. In addition, the more complete data assembled by Tech Executive-1 and his associates reflected that DNS lookups involving the EOP and Russian Phone Provider-1 began at least as early 2014 (i.e., during the Obama administration and years before Trump took office) – another fact which the allegations omitted.

7. In his meeting with Agency-2 employees, the defendant also made a substantially similar false statement as he had made to the FBI General Counsel. In particular, the defendant  asserted that he was not representing a particular client in conveying the above allegations. In truth and in fact, the defendant was representing Tech Executive-1 – a fact the defendant subsequently acknowledged under oath in December 2017 testimony before Congress (without identifying the client by name).

APPLICABLE LAW

8. The Sixth Amendment guarantees that “[i]n all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall … have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense.” U.S. Const. Amend. VI. A defendant’s Sixth Amendment right includes the “right to representation that is free from conflicts of interest,” Wood v. Georgia, 450 U.S. 261, 271 (1981), but also carries a “presumption in favor of counsel of choice,” Wheat v. United States, 486 U.S. 153, 160 (1988). At the same time, a criminal defendant’s right to retain counsel of his choice is not absolute. The “essential aim” of the Sixth Amendment “is to guarantee an effective advocate for each criminal defendant rather than to ensure that a defendant will inexorably be represented by the lawyer whom he prefers.” Wheat, 46 U.S. at 159. Thus, even if a defendant waives the right to conflict-free representation, the presumption in favor of defendant’s counsel of choice “may be overcome not only by a demonstration of actual conflict but also by a showing of a serious potential for conflict.” Wheat, 486 U.S. at 163–64.

9. As the D.C. Circuit explained in United States v. Lopesierra–Gutierrez, 708 F.3d 193, 199–200 (D.C. Cir. 2013), “a defendant’s counsel-of-choice right may sometimes be trumped by a conflict of interest.” This is because “where a defendant’s chosen counsel suffers from a conflict of interest, . . . the court’s own institutional interests” are implicated. Id. Guaranteeing conflict-free counsel protects not just defendants’ rights, but also the “‘[f]ederal courts[’] … independent interest in ensuring that criminal trials are conducted within the ethical standards of the [legal] profession and that legal proceedings appear fair to all who observe them.’” Id. (alterations in original) (quoting Wheat, 486 U.S. at 161).

 10. Since the Court has an independent interest in investigating potential conflicts, see Wheat, 486 U.S. at 161, the Court retains “substantial latitude in refusing waivers of conflicts of interest not only in those rare cases where an actual conflict may be demonstrated before trial, but in the more common cases where a potential for conflict exists which may or may not burgeon into an actual conflict as the trial progresses.” Id. at 163. Accordingly, “[i]f in the context of a particular case the district court believes a conflict is intolerable, it may decline to accept a defendant’s waiver.” Lopesierra–Gutierrez, 708 F.3d at 202. “In making this determination, a court balances the defendant’s right to choose his representative against both the defendant’s countervailing right to conflict-free representation and the court’s independent interest in the integrity of criminal proceedings.” Id. at 200 (emphasis in original). The key inquiry in this analysis is the “nature and extent of the conflict.” Id.

  DISCUSSION

11. The Government respectfully requests that the Court inquire concerning the following issues that may give rise to potential conflicts of interest with regard to Latham’s current representation of the defendant: I. Latham’s Prior Representations in the Special Counsel’s Investigation A. Latham’s Prior Representation of Law Firm-1 and Campaign Lawyer-1 in This Investigation

12. From approximately July 2020 through approximately July 2021, Latham represented three separate clients – the defendant, Law Firm-1, and Campaign Lawyer-1 – in connection with the Special Counsel’s investigation.1 As part of its representations, Latham communicated and met with the Special Counsel’s Office and other DOJ officials on behalf of each of these clients. As noted above, the Indictment alleges that Tech Executive-1 conferred and consulted with both the defendant and Campaign Lawyer-1 on multiple occasions in connection with the Russian Bank-1 allegations. As a result, the Government expects that testimony at trial will address factual issues concerning, among other things, (i) the extent to which the defendant did or did not inform Campaign Lawyer-1 and Law Firm-1 that he was billing work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations to the Clinton Campaign, (ii) the extent to which the defendant did or did not inform or receive instructions from Campaign Lawyer-1 and Law Firm-1 regarding his billing of the Clinton Campaign and his meeting with the FBI General Counsel, and (iii) the defendant’s potential motives to mislead the FBI concerning whether he was working with or on behalf of the Clinton Campaign, Campaign Lawyer-1, and Tech Executive-1. In each of these areas, the defendant’s interests may diverge from those of Campaign Lawyer-1 and Law Firm-1. In addition, to the extent that the defendant’s factual accounts might differ from those of Campaign Lawyer-1 and Law Firm-1 on these issues, Latham may already have gained privileged insights to any such differences from their prior, confidential attorney-client communications. Cf. United States v. Gotti, 9 F. Supp. 2d 320, 323–25 (S.D.N.Y. 1998) (“attorney-client relationship with the witness or co-defendant gave rise to continuing obligations of loyalty and confidentiality that may be breached when the confidences are required to be exploited in, for example, cross examining [a] former client”); cf. also United States v. Weaver, 265 F.3d 1]074, 1075–77 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (holding that counsel’s representation of a client and a potential witness against the client created a conflict of interest).

13. Moreover, it is possible that the defendant, having recently resigned from his partnership at Law Firm-1, is currently or will become in an adversarial posture with his former employer. Latham – through its prior representation of Law Firm-1 – likely possesses confidential knowledge about Law Firm-1’s role in, and views concerning, the defendant’s past activities. Accordingly, the Government believes that potential conflicts of interest may exist or arise from Latham’s prior representations of Campaign Lawyer-1 and Law Firm-1 in this investigation.

B. Law Firm-1’s Representation of the Clinton Campaign and Another Political Organization

14. Potential conflicts of interest might also arise from the fact that during the time period when Latham represented all three of the aforementioned clients, one of those clients, Law Firm-1, was representing both the Clinton Campaign and a related political organization (“Political Organization-1”) in the Special Counsel’s investigation. Law Firm-1’s representations of those clients began in approximately May 2021 and ended in approximately July 2021. The Government believes that Law Firm-1’s prior representations of these entities may give rise to potential conflicts of interest because it is possible that Law Firm-1 shared confidential facts and/or communications concerning its representation of those clients with its then-counsel, Latham. In addition, to the extent the Government offers documents and other evidence at trial that it obtained from the Clinton Campaign and/or Political Organization-1, Latham’s duties to its former client (Law Firm-1) might cause its interests to diverge from those of the defendant in connection with such evidence and/or the cross examination of witnesses. Accordingly, the Government respectfully requests that the Court inquire into any potential conflicts, including an examination of whether Law Firm-1’s own representations of the Clinton Campaign and Political Organization-1 may contribute to or amplify such conflicts. Gotti, 9 F Supp. 2d at 323-25.

II. Latham’s Other Representations in Related Matters

15. In addition to the above representations, Latham also has represented the defendant, Law Firm-1, and Campaign Lawyer-1 in other matters that predated the existence of the Special Counsel’s investigation but which are likely relevant to these proceedings. In particular, the Government is aware of the following: A. Latham’s Representation of the Defendant in his December 2017 Congressional Testimony

16. Latham served as counsel to the defendant and Law Firm-1 in connection with the defendant’s December 2017 testimony before the House Permanent Subcommittee on Intelligence. That testimony addressed the Russian Bank-1 allegations and other matters. At numerous times during the defendant’s testimony, attorneys from Latham interjected to clarify and/or address issues relating to attorney-client privilege and other topics.2 In his testimony, the defendant acknowledged bringing the Russian Bank-1 allegations to the FBI General Counsel and to Agency-2 on behalf of a specific client, namely, Tech Executive-1 (whom the defendant did not identify by name). The Government expects to offer this testimony at trial to prove that the defendant knowingly and intentionally lied when he stated to the FBI General Counsel in September 2016 that he was not acting on behalf of “any client.” The Government also may seek to establish that the defendant’s Congressional testimony itself was knowingly and intentionally misleading insofar as it failed to
_________________________________________________________________________2 Both of the Latham attorneys who were present for the defendant’s testimony (one of whom is the Department of Justice employee referenced above) have since left the firm.
(pagebreak)

disclose that the defendant billed work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations to the Clinton Campaign. Because Latham attorneys played a role in, and were witnesses to, this testimony and related conversations, it is possible that their past advice might give rise to a potential conflict of interest. For example, it is possible that motion practice surrounding the admissibility of this testimony may require consideration of issues such as the appropriate boundaries of the attorney-client privilege, the potential waiver of such privilege by the defendant or Tech Executive-1 and the Clinton Campaign, and/or the potential applicability of an advice of counsel defense. Because Latham attorneys witnessed the defendant’s testimony and advised both the defendant and his employer in connection therewith, it is possible that conflicts of interest would arise in connection with these matters. Gotti, 9 F. Supp. 2d at 324 (“An attorney may be disqualified if he has first-hand knowledge of events that may be part of the government’s proof at trial.”)

B. Latham’s Advice to Law Firm-1 in Connection with Public Statements in 2018

17. In 2018, Latham also advised Law Firm-1 concerning the drafting and issuance of statements to the media that Law Firm-1 made concerning the defendant’s October 2016 meeting with the FBI General Counsel. Those statements – which the defendant appears to have reviewed or assisted in drafting – were at least partially inaccurate and/or misleading. The Government therefore may seek to offer these statements at trial pursuant to Rule 404(b) or other provisions of law. The two statements are, in pertinent part, as follows:

  • On or about October 12, 2018, Law Firm-1 issued a statement to multiple media

outlets in which the firm stated, in part: “When Sussmann met with [the FBI General
Counsel] on behalf of a client, it was not connected to the firm’s representation of the
Hillary Clinton Campaign, the DNC or any Political Law Group client.” 

  • On or about October 18, 2018, the then-Managing Partner of Law Firm-1 wrote a letter to the editor of a major newspaper in which he asserted, in part, “Mr. Sussmann’s meeting with the FBI General Counsel James Baker was on behalf of a client with no connections to either the Clinton campaign, the DNC or any other Political Law Group client.”

Privilege logs and redacted emails obtained from Law Firm-1 in this investigation reflect that in the days before the issuance of these statements, Latham attorneys sent, received, and/or were copied on correspondence relating to the drafting and dissemination of the statements. (Much of the substance of those emails was redacted and withheld from the Special Counsel’s Office pursuant to Law Firm-1’s assertion of attorney-client privilege and attorney work product protections). Because the defendant was aware of and/or reviewed these media statements, the Government may seek to offer them as evidence pursuant to Rule 404(b) or other provisions of law to establish that the defendant sought to conceal the Clinton Campaign’s ties to the Russian Bank-1 allegations from the FBI and others.3 Latham’s advice concerning these statements therefore may become at issue in motions in limine, trial testimony, or other aspects of these proceedings. Accordingly, Latham may encounter potential conflicts of interest in advising the defendant concerning past events in which Latham played a significant role.

III. Defense Counsel’s Prior Interactions with Witnesses or Potential Witnesses
_________________________________________________________________________
3 According to counsel for Law Firm-1, the attorneys at Law Firm-1 and Latham who participated in drafting and/or reviewing these statements were unaware at the time that the defendant had billed work on the Russian Bank-1 allegations to the Clinton Campaign.
(page break)

18. Based on its review of documents in its investigation and other information, the Special Counsel’s Office also has learned that one of the members of the defendant’s current defense team (“Defense Team Member-1”) previously worked as Special Counsel to the then-FBI Director from 2013 to 2014. In connection with that work, Defense Team Member-1 developed professional and/or personal relationships with several individuals who later were involved with and/or knowledgeable of the FBI’s investigation of the Russian Bank-1 allegations. For example, Defense Team Member-1 appears to have developed a professional relationship with the former FBI General Counsel to whom the defendant made his alleged false statement and who will likely be a central witness at trial.4 While it is unlikely that these past interactions and activities will give rise to an actual conflict of interest, the Government respectfully requests in an abundance of caution that the Court inquire with the defense concerning whether Defense Team Member-1’s relationships with persons and entities who might be witnesses in this case could give rise to a potential conflict or appearance issue and, if so, whether the defendant waives any such conflict. See Lyle v. Artuz, No 03-CV-5155 (CBA), 2006 WL 1517750 at *20 (E.D.N.Y. May 31, 2006)(examining whether defense counsel’s relationship with a trial witness gave rise to a conflict of interest).
_________________________________________________________________________

4 Following his employment at the FBI, Defense Team Member-1 worked from 2014 to early 2017 as an attorney in the EOP which, as noted above, was involved in certain factual issues that the Government expects will be relevant at trial and any sentencing proceedings. Latham has represented to the Government that while employed at the EOP, Defense Team Member-1 had no role in the aforementioned events or arrangements involving Tech Executive-1, Internet Company1, and/or allegations involving the purported use of Russian-made phones. The Government similarly has not seen evidence to suggest that Defense Team Member-1 had any role in, or direct knowledge of, the Russian Bank-1 allegations or the FBI’s ensuing investigation.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the Court should inquire regarding the potential conflicts of interest set forth above.

Respectfully submitted, JOHN H. DURHAM
Special Counsel

By:
/s/ Andrew J. DeFilippis

Jonathan E. Algor
Assistant Special Counsel
jonathan.algor@usdoj.gov

Andrew J. DeFilippis
Assistant Special Counsel
andrew.defilippis@usdoj.gov

Michael T. Keilty
Assistant Special Counsel
michael.keilty@usdoj.gov 

Mark Rakow

Thank you for posting this. Seriously; I appreciate it very much. To be honest, I’ve been quite busy the last couple of days, and I haven’t had time to read the court filing.

That said, however, it’s not quite what I was expecting. To be honest, I was expecting something much more substantial and fact-laden. Accordingly, this may be why there’s been so little coverage of it by legacy media. In all honesty, this doesn’t appear to add much to the case, such as it is. I do plan to read this document a lot more closely, because I may well have missed some important details; I merely scanned it, in the last 10 minutes or so. Tell you what, though: if I find something I think you ought to know, I promise to share it. Hell, why not? Here again, you probably won’t believe I’d do that. But it seems to me, if you were good enough to post the document, the least I can do is extend the courtesy.

How’s that?

Mark Rakow

No? Fine.
You had your chance.

griffthegrand@yahoo.com

You think so highly of yourself that I’d actually need the likes of you to read anything for me to tell me what you think is of relevance in it?

Really??? laughing hysterically

Somehow I don’t think your credentials (if you actually have any) even come close to Durham’s.

If so go ahead and list them side by side for us then, and don’t forget the links.

Glenn

Do you realize how many legal actions are pending for Mr. Trump. Too many to post here for the crook. If I included those he “paid off/settled”, the total would double. Said differently your copy/paste job, is peanuts!!!

Dean

There is no “story” here.
So far this is big, tall SPIN
Let’s see what Durham really has when one of his two charges goes to court in a couple of months.

(This is real fake news and seems to be a coordinated noise making effort betewwn TRUMP operatives, Fox News, NY Post, etc.)

THosk

Sweat it out Dean, I can smell your fear……

Hillary’s going down (In the court of public opinion), and she won’t be coming back.

Whatever else happens, is just icing on the cake.

Last edited 7 months ago by THosk
Mark Rakow

I wouldn’t go so far as to say there’s NO story here. But there may not be as much of a story as some would have us believe. I need to read the document a lot more closely. THosk was kind enough to post it, and I offered to return the favor, and share whatever seems worthwhile.

I’m not sure he’ll take me up on my offer, but he was decent enough to post the document. Let’s face it; he didn’t have to. This seems the very least I can do in return.

Cary Miller

Yes Sir Mr. PRESIDENT! They are not going to do “The Right Thing”! So, how many chances do these American hating Communists get? How many? I’ve been fighting the DS my entire life and now we just had the funeral for my Brother, murdered he was, WITH EVIL COVID19 “PROTOCOLS”. So when do we get our JUSTICE? I’m sorry, am I being too impatient? Tough! We all want JUSTICE!
A RECKONING

~ StoneGem PATRIOT ~

Cary Miller

“A Traitors JUSTICE!”

Liketoknow

Protocol is killing to many people when is all this craziness going to be put to an end.. . The time to move is now, not tomorrow, if they arent woke by now they never will be….

Hannah

You have very broad strong shoulders and I for one want to thank you for taking all the arrows that have been thrown at you and we the people. You believe in America as most of us do, you remember America most of us do. You want to preserve America as most of us do. What’s been done to you is unexcusable and by far the most damning thing that could ever be done. It wasn’t just to destroy you, Mr. President, it was to destroy the democracy and the freedom of what America stands for. They keep changing the narrative but the goal is America last, illegals to vote, damn nation of our America. Thank you for not allowing that to happen! Many stand behind you and most must make sure this is not forgotten, forgiven, or allowed to go on. The guilty must pay. Treason is the worst kind of evil. Treason is punishable by death as it should be. Thank you for being there, continue to be there, we’re behind you. From one American loving individual to another, I thank you.
Must make sure that Hillary Rodman Clinton cannot and will not get away with this and by no means should she ever think about running for president of the United States. Her only objective would be to continue with a 16 year plan and destroying America. We must be sure the press covers this and if they don’t we have digital warriors that will get the word out. Truth social is coming soon! Thank Goodness, can’t wait.

Last edited 7 months ago by Hannah
Rex

It isn’t democrat or republican. It is Maga or the people is why no coverage

Gerald Warner

For the big tech lawsuit all of these companies are also going against pac rules/laws favoring and having major impact on elections

THosk

When the indictments start to fall, they’ll have to start covering it.

(it’ll just be too big of a major news story)

Last edited 7 months ago by THosk
Craig Barrett

The press is complicit, I don’t watch their trash

YOUR Help is Needed

We need YOUR help to spread the word of the 45th President